17 the 45000 hectares of the Reserve.84 No consultations were conducted with indigenous communities either when the concession was granted or when the mining activities commenced in 1997.85 Environmental or social impact assessments were similarly not conducted.86 The mining activities and their effects are further discussed below. 58. The Wane Kreek Reserve has recently seen an increase in activities such as legal and illegal logging, illegal poaching, and sand, gravel, and kaolin mining.87 59. In short, all three Reserves were created without any formal consultation or consent procedure, which has also not been conducted with respect to the activities that have been implemented after their creation, including mining concessions. In addition, the law creating Wia Wia and Galibi Reserves establishes restrictions that prohibit access and activities by the Kaliña and Lokono peoples. These restrictions have recently been intensified in practice. In the Wane Kreek Reserve, a mining concession was been granted without the consultation or consent of the Kaliña and Lokono, and mining operations were authorized and commenced in the 1990s also without any consultation or consent. Although the law establishing the Wane Kreek Reserve provides for respect of “rights” of “bushland inhabitants living in tribal form” within the Reserve, the State places restrictions on traditional indigenous activities in the Reserve. E. Issuance of Individual Land Titles In 1975, the government initiated a parceling project called “Tuinstad Albina.”88 As part of this project, the government granted land titles to indigenous and non-indigenous individuals in the area surrounding the town of Albina, including territories claimed by the Kaliña and Lokono as their ancestral lands.89 Between 1976 and the present, titles of ownership, long term lease and lease hold were granted in the indigenous villages of Erowarte, Tapuku, Pierrekondre and Wan Shi Sha.90 The petitioners claim that Suriname is in possession of information regarding the specific dates on which these titles were granted; the State has neither denied that it has this information, nor provided it.91 60. …Continuation 83 Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, p. 10, and Annex 21. Attachment III to Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, Affidavit of Glenn Renaldo Kingswijk; Annex 6. Petition, para. 140; Annex 8. Expert Report of Dr. Stuart Kirsch, November 25, 2010, pp. 11-12. 84 Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, p. 10, and Annex 21. Attachment III to Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, Affidavit of Glenn Renaldo Kingswijk; Annex 6. Petition, para. 86. 85 Submission of Suriname, September 12, 2008, p. 10. 86 Annex 8. Expert Report of Dr. Stuart Kirsch, November 25, 2010, p. 12. 87 Annex 8. Expert Report of Dr. Stuart Kirsch, November 25, 2010, p. 7. 88 Submission of Suriname, March 22, 2008, p. 3. 89 Submission of Suriname, March 22, 2008, p. 3, n. 6; see also Annex 6. Petition, para. 74, and Annex 22. Annex J to the Petition, Partial List of Non-Indigenous Title Holders. Individual land titles to non-idigenous persons have been issued in the villages of Pierrekondre, Marijkedorp (Wan Shi sha) and Erowarte. Annex 5. Submission of the petitioners, May 28, 2008, Annex E, “Traditional use and management of the Lower Marowijne area by the Kaliña and Lokono: A Surinamese case study in the context of article 10(c) of the Convention on Biological Diversity”, February 17, 2006, p. 106. 90 Annex 6. Petition, paras. 74, 117; Submission of Suriname, March 22, 2008, p. 3. 91 Submission of the petitioners, October 29, 2008, para. 31.